I love stories in the press about "peak oil". They are always presented like we have no choice but to drill baby drill.
Peak oil is a simple concept, when will we burn more oil per day than we pump out of the ground? If you're today's press, a little fear mongering is a great way to develop a headline or two.
The argument, (today's press's bread and butter) is that there is plenty of oil, or, we have already reached peak. Our latest oil shock was partially attributable to the demand issues of an emerging China and India. Many felt the peak was reached and the price of oil reflected that. The press ran with that worldwide.
But let's step back for a minute. Is the real issue peak oil? Or is the real issue peak demand? When will we humans stop growing our demand for oil? Or, more importantly, when will the nation that leads the free world, the US, reach peak demand?
So, do we have to drill our way to the last drop?
That is entirely our choice. We are not destined to run out of oil, or fight more wars over it. It's not pre-ordained. We are not locked in to a peak oil economy!
So I reject the idea that it's a supply issue and I reject the notion that we are stuck here. We all know that oil in every form is bad for our environment, bad for our geo politics, bad for our image around the world, bad for our soldiers and bad for our economy. What once was the engine of our growth is now a millstone around our neck.
Before we can address this challenge let's at least get it defined correctly. It isn't how much oil is out there or who we have to fight to get it...it's how much we use. And we have a choice about that, and, we should support every effort to reduce it. Alternate forms of energy are out there and they are becoming more competitive every day.
Showing posts with label Big Picture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Picture. Show all posts
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
New mileage standards
Today's green headlines talk a lot about new aggressive mileage standards for vehicles in the US, and California.
We have had mileage standards for many years yet we are far behind the rest of the world on this front. In addition:
Our car makers are on life support.
We import a huge amount of oil.
The city of Dallas regularly exceeds its air pollution standards.
The question is...are all those things caused by the vagaries of the market or is it in fact the problem with government rule making? Is the government able to implement and manage complex market changing regulation when large scale business is involved?
The answer is no.
Our car makers are a huge industry with a lot of political clout. They are union labor which has huge political clout. The foreign car makers doing business in our markets have clout. The oil companies who depend on the car business have huge clout. All the tertiary businesses connected to cars represent a large amount of voters.
With all of that monetary and voter pressure to "do whats right " for the auto industry, what politician could do anything different than be highly sensitive to their wishes?
We now have a 650 page initial document on new vehicle mileage standards and it will surely grow as it goes through the public comment stage. Why 650 pages? Its all the "considerations" of the industry as described.
We all know that the SUV craze was caused by the government exempting this group from the lower car mileage standards. The regulation caused Detroit to focus on big cars and trucks and make more money with them because they had little foreign competition. They became dependent on that revenue stream that dried up with the $4.00 gas price. This crippled the US Auto industry.
So looking back now, what should we have done? In my view it's simple. Let the market work.
When we had an energy crisis in the Carter era we should have responded with real change...many countries did. But instead we worked really hard to get OPEC in line and get things back to "normal". We sold our independence and stability for cheap foreign oil. Why, because we could. We were huge customers that could bomb them off the map. We have been meddling in Middle East affairs ever since.
So we have artificially supported cheap oil. We spend a huge amount of money (and lives) making sure we get our cheap oil. This is a government distortion of the market...they enact the diplomacy and the wars.
Oil comes from risky places, is an environmental mess, is price volatile, pollution generating and politically and religiously charged. But does $2.00 a gallon gas reflect that? Of course not, it's an artificially low price matched only by the big oil producing countries themselves.
So a $5.00 a gallon price might be more accurate and you could throw away that 650 page document. American consumers have already shown they will eschew big cars and trucks at $4.00 a gallon and so has the rest of the world.
A pollution fee for the air we foul and a military fee on gasoline would do the trick, and be a lot less pages. Or we could just make an amendment to the constitution that we would never use military might to secure goods and services outside our borders.
Bottom Line - Cheap oil is bad because it's artificially cheap. To enact laws and complex regulations to artificially make us all use less of an artificially cheap product is silly. To spend more money bailing out Detroit because of our own artificial market distortions is sillier yet.
There is some new sabre rattling about reducing the huge incentives and supports for the oil industry. Can you imagine? We artificially support our oil companies? Just like our farmers and our auto industry? Does any of this artificial support work in the long run?
We have to artificially support renewable energy so it can compete with the artificially supported oil and coal industries?
I get the feeling that good lobbyists are way more valuable than a good product aimed at a healthy market.
We have had mileage standards for many years yet we are far behind the rest of the world on this front. In addition:
Our car makers are on life support.
We import a huge amount of oil.
The city of Dallas regularly exceeds its air pollution standards.
The question is...are all those things caused by the vagaries of the market or is it in fact the problem with government rule making? Is the government able to implement and manage complex market changing regulation when large scale business is involved?
The answer is no.
Our car makers are a huge industry with a lot of political clout. They are union labor which has huge political clout. The foreign car makers doing business in our markets have clout. The oil companies who depend on the car business have huge clout. All the tertiary businesses connected to cars represent a large amount of voters.
With all of that monetary and voter pressure to "do whats right " for the auto industry, what politician could do anything different than be highly sensitive to their wishes?
We now have a 650 page initial document on new vehicle mileage standards and it will surely grow as it goes through the public comment stage. Why 650 pages? Its all the "considerations" of the industry as described.
We all know that the SUV craze was caused by the government exempting this group from the lower car mileage standards. The regulation caused Detroit to focus on big cars and trucks and make more money with them because they had little foreign competition. They became dependent on that revenue stream that dried up with the $4.00 gas price. This crippled the US Auto industry.
So looking back now, what should we have done? In my view it's simple. Let the market work.
When we had an energy crisis in the Carter era we should have responded with real change...many countries did. But instead we worked really hard to get OPEC in line and get things back to "normal". We sold our independence and stability for cheap foreign oil. Why, because we could. We were huge customers that could bomb them off the map. We have been meddling in Middle East affairs ever since.
So we have artificially supported cheap oil. We spend a huge amount of money (and lives) making sure we get our cheap oil. This is a government distortion of the market...they enact the diplomacy and the wars.
Oil comes from risky places, is an environmental mess, is price volatile, pollution generating and politically and religiously charged. But does $2.00 a gallon gas reflect that? Of course not, it's an artificially low price matched only by the big oil producing countries themselves.
So a $5.00 a gallon price might be more accurate and you could throw away that 650 page document. American consumers have already shown they will eschew big cars and trucks at $4.00 a gallon and so has the rest of the world.
A pollution fee for the air we foul and a military fee on gasoline would do the trick, and be a lot less pages. Or we could just make an amendment to the constitution that we would never use military might to secure goods and services outside our borders.
Bottom Line - Cheap oil is bad because it's artificially cheap. To enact laws and complex regulations to artificially make us all use less of an artificially cheap product is silly. To spend more money bailing out Detroit because of our own artificial market distortions is sillier yet.
There is some new sabre rattling about reducing the huge incentives and supports for the oil industry. Can you imagine? We artificially support our oil companies? Just like our farmers and our auto industry? Does any of this artificial support work in the long run?
We have to artificially support renewable energy so it can compete with the artificially supported oil and coal industries?
I get the feeling that good lobbyists are way more valuable than a good product aimed at a healthy market.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Trees and woodchippers
I was watching a show called "Extreme Loggers". Those guys have a saw at the end of a big machine on tracks. It takes about a second to cut down a tree. (Chainsaws are way too slow.) Another big machine grabs the logs and hauls them to a wood chipper a few hundred yards away. There another big machine feeds the logs into the wood chipper that dumps into a semi truck to be hauled to the paper mill.
A tree can become a pile of chips in a truck in about 15 minutes easy. They do hundreds of trees a day in a small operation.
It seems odd to me that that's the best use of a forest we can come up with. It also seems odd we cant find another way to make paper. Odder still is that we still need all that paper in our digital society. Weren't we going "paperless" 20 years ago? Did that concept end up in a scrap heap along with the idea of changing over to the metric system?
Bottom Line - I guess its like watching sausage being made, if you did you wouldn't eat sausage. Same with pulp logging. Watching these guys ruin a few acres of forest in a day makes me a little queasy.
Lumber seems different, except when we ship it to Asia. Something about our forests going to Chinese housing so they can have a place to live while they dominate global manufacturing.
A tree can become a pile of chips in a truck in about 15 minutes easy. They do hundreds of trees a day in a small operation.
It seems odd to me that that's the best use of a forest we can come up with. It also seems odd we cant find another way to make paper. Odder still is that we still need all that paper in our digital society. Weren't we going "paperless" 20 years ago? Did that concept end up in a scrap heap along with the idea of changing over to the metric system?
Bottom Line - I guess its like watching sausage being made, if you did you wouldn't eat sausage. Same with pulp logging. Watching these guys ruin a few acres of forest in a day makes me a little queasy.
Lumber seems different, except when we ship it to Asia. Something about our forests going to Chinese housing so they can have a place to live while they dominate global manufacturing.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Can I sell you some energy?
Have I got a deal for you! I have two great energy products, one is coal and the other is oil! This is a can't miss deal.
Coal is plentiful and cheap! We mine it in areas where people are poor and the health and land problems are way less important than jobs. We either mine it, or when we can, we just dig it out of the ground or blow off the top of a mountain. We have to cut down a lot trees and use a lot of water but like I said, the people that live there are all for it...they have no other choice!
We take the coal just like it is and pile it into trains that ship it everywhere, that's why its so cheap! You build your power plant close to a rail siding and together we've got a great business! Just don't build it too close to any major metropolitan areas because of the, well, the stuff that comes out of the plant.
Burning coal for electricity has a couple of minor problems. The coal, when it's burned, emits a lot of bad stuff like sulfur, mercury, and even carbon dioxide. But who ever heard of anyone dying of carbon dioxide poisoning? But here is the beauty of coal, that stuff we put in the air, we don't really have to pay for it! No-one will charge you for all the fish with mercury in them, will they?
Bottom Line #1- Use all the coal fired electricity you want, it's cheap now and they will never trace climate change back to you!
If coal doesn't get you excited, oil will. We drill holes in the ground and pump this stuff up, send it to a plant that makes it into all kinds of stuff, but mostly gasoline for your car. What's even better is these days we don't even drill that much, we just buy if from those nice boys in Venezuela, Saudi Arabia etc. They have so much that they can ship it all the way over here and it's still cheap! That way we don't spoil the land or water around here, we let them do it to their land.
Now I know what you have heard about price instability, but look at it this way. It's still cheap. Sometimes it gets expensive but when it does we can just quit using it until the recession is over, easy no?
If we have trouble with a country who has a lot of oil, we can always get them back in line with diplomacy, and a few Marines. If that doesn't work, we will just send more Marines. But the cost wont go up that much and once we get them back in line, the price always comes down.
Now I know what you have heard about pollution and oil, gasoline, etc but hey, everything emits bad stuff when you burn it! And remember it's cheap!
Bottom Line #2 - Oil is cheap and chances are good that Iran's oil money wont allow them to build a nuclear device that can hit the US for at least ten years. So why worry?
The siren song of cheap is real. It's hard to say no to cheap energy. China doesn't want to, India either. A little cheap energy and before long your hooked. Everything becomes secondary to cheap energy... heath, economic stability, wars, environment, jobs, religion, morality, balance of trade, climate change etc...you'll sell your soul for this stuff.
We have traditionally sacrificed much in the name of cheap energy and grown to be a superpower. Why do we think others wont follow our lead into the abyss of cheap energy addiction? They have and will continue to, until...we show a better way.
Bottom Line #3 - We know the cost of cheap energy is too high. Those costs shake the very foundation of our economy and democracy. It's time for us to lead the world to new forms of energy and show them the road to prosperity isn't cheap energy, it's democracy, innovation, education, hard work, the rule of law, freedom of speech, and, peace.
Just say no to "cheap" energy.
Coal is plentiful and cheap! We mine it in areas where people are poor and the health and land problems are way less important than jobs. We either mine it, or when we can, we just dig it out of the ground or blow off the top of a mountain. We have to cut down a lot trees and use a lot of water but like I said, the people that live there are all for it...they have no other choice!
We take the coal just like it is and pile it into trains that ship it everywhere, that's why its so cheap! You build your power plant close to a rail siding and together we've got a great business! Just don't build it too close to any major metropolitan areas because of the, well, the stuff that comes out of the plant.
Burning coal for electricity has a couple of minor problems. The coal, when it's burned, emits a lot of bad stuff like sulfur, mercury, and even carbon dioxide. But who ever heard of anyone dying of carbon dioxide poisoning? But here is the beauty of coal, that stuff we put in the air, we don't really have to pay for it! No-one will charge you for all the fish with mercury in them, will they?
Bottom Line #1- Use all the coal fired electricity you want, it's cheap now and they will never trace climate change back to you!
If coal doesn't get you excited, oil will. We drill holes in the ground and pump this stuff up, send it to a plant that makes it into all kinds of stuff, but mostly gasoline for your car. What's even better is these days we don't even drill that much, we just buy if from those nice boys in Venezuela, Saudi Arabia etc. They have so much that they can ship it all the way over here and it's still cheap! That way we don't spoil the land or water around here, we let them do it to their land.
Now I know what you have heard about price instability, but look at it this way. It's still cheap. Sometimes it gets expensive but when it does we can just quit using it until the recession is over, easy no?
If we have trouble with a country who has a lot of oil, we can always get them back in line with diplomacy, and a few Marines. If that doesn't work, we will just send more Marines. But the cost wont go up that much and once we get them back in line, the price always comes down.
Now I know what you have heard about pollution and oil, gasoline, etc but hey, everything emits bad stuff when you burn it! And remember it's cheap!
Bottom Line #2 - Oil is cheap and chances are good that Iran's oil money wont allow them to build a nuclear device that can hit the US for at least ten years. So why worry?
The siren song of cheap is real. It's hard to say no to cheap energy. China doesn't want to, India either. A little cheap energy and before long your hooked. Everything becomes secondary to cheap energy... heath, economic stability, wars, environment, jobs, religion, morality, balance of trade, climate change etc...you'll sell your soul for this stuff.
We have traditionally sacrificed much in the name of cheap energy and grown to be a superpower. Why do we think others wont follow our lead into the abyss of cheap energy addiction? They have and will continue to, until...we show a better way.
Bottom Line #3 - We know the cost of cheap energy is too high. Those costs shake the very foundation of our economy and democracy. It's time for us to lead the world to new forms of energy and show them the road to prosperity isn't cheap energy, it's democracy, innovation, education, hard work, the rule of law, freedom of speech, and, peace.
Just say no to "cheap" energy.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Conservation and waste
It seems that every effort to be environmentally more responsible comes with trade offs. In fact, I think its the hardest part...measuring the pro's and cons. Time and money are two obvious ones but then you have to consider carbon, pollution, landfills, etc etc. Here is my stab at criteria for deciding in order of priority.
Bottom Line - You can probably run many opportunities to go green through that list and better decide where to prioritize it...the first five are in my view, the must do's, and the last four are options for continuing to go green. Of course, if you get an item that covers multiple entries high on the list, jump on it!
- Harmful use. If something we do, buy or consume is considered harmful, we need to address it first. Pouring used motor oil in the sewer is harmful.
- Second is waste. If the item serves no function, then it's waste. Wasting is bad economically and karmic-ly. Cutting out waste is usually immediate change, but its not to be confused with "use".
- Charitable value. If your green efforts and actions can help those less fortunate or needy, it's a great opportunity.
- When it's easily cheaper to do it the green way. Saving money is likely to make the action stick. Otherwise we only have our conscious to remind us...
- Change what can make a difference today. Not using paper or plastic is today. Changing to CFLs is today. Immediate gratification is good to keep us going on to the harder things.
- Long term payoffs are next. These items are usually larger, like a more energy efficient car or a solar hot water heater.
- Actions that soothe one's conscious but aren't likely to make economic sense. It's something that bothers you, like buying a newer more efficient refrigerator rather than keeping the old inefficient one.
- Reducing use is a tricky one. Not really waste but you could do with less of something, like a few degrees on your thermostat or turning off your security lights. If going green makes your life less enjoyable it's a bad idea. If you choose to drive up the street to get a Starbucks, go for it, if you choose the biggest car you have to do it, that's waste.
- Trends and fads, i.e. keeping up with the Joneses' and their new Prius purchase is probably the least compelling reason to go green. That's how people ended up driving Hummers! It was a fad too!
Bottom Line - You can probably run many opportunities to go green through that list and better decide where to prioritize it...the first five are in my view, the must do's, and the last four are options for continuing to go green. Of course, if you get an item that covers multiple entries high on the list, jump on it!
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Why go green?
It's the environment. The ONE we live in. The one our kids will live in. It's like we live in a terrarium, we live, eat and breathe in a closed system. It's inevitable the way we are going, with our population and productivity growth, that we will foul our nest. Is it our generation's responsibility?
We know there are problems, but going green is uncomfortable, complex, expensive and just downright hard. Is it because we are born to waste and pollute - it's part of our DNA? Or is it just habit and cultural? Why is it so hard to keep the terrarium clean?
We are going through a very steep learning curve on how to keep the environment intact. We happen to be the generation that will take this challenge, mainly because of climate change. That environmental problem effects every human and seems to be engendering a cultural shift on all forms of fouling of our nest.
Bottom Line #1 - There are just too many of us to just pollute our terrarium willy nilly. We have to address many of the problems associated with human growth and productivity.
Our environment also has resources for our growth and existence as a species. We are dependent on those resources and again, we just have our terrarium's worth to work with. We cant move to a new, abundant one.
Bottom Line #2 - There are too many of us to just use resources without care and forethought.
"Going green" seems like a moniker that falls way short of the problem at hand. Sustainable, environmental, etc. all fail to capture the scope and urgency of us just using up and fouling our terrarium. Whatever you call it, it's worth the trouble.
Our generation will have to reverse the trend, we will be the ones that make the cultural shift and develop the technologies, laws and regulations to keep ourselves in check. We may even learn to work with other nations for a common good...which is bound to draw us closer.
Bottom Line #3 - "Green" is the catalyst for change. We have an opportunity to secure the future by caring about our own terrarium. By definition it's worth the trouble. The byproduct will be an increased consciousness of how we share this world and that our actions affect others, globally.
We know there are problems, but going green is uncomfortable, complex, expensive and just downright hard. Is it because we are born to waste and pollute - it's part of our DNA? Or is it just habit and cultural? Why is it so hard to keep the terrarium clean?
We are going through a very steep learning curve on how to keep the environment intact. We happen to be the generation that will take this challenge, mainly because of climate change. That environmental problem effects every human and seems to be engendering a cultural shift on all forms of fouling of our nest.
Bottom Line #1 - There are just too many of us to just pollute our terrarium willy nilly. We have to address many of the problems associated with human growth and productivity.
Our environment also has resources for our growth and existence as a species. We are dependent on those resources and again, we just have our terrarium's worth to work with. We cant move to a new, abundant one.
Bottom Line #2 - There are too many of us to just use resources without care and forethought.
"Going green" seems like a moniker that falls way short of the problem at hand. Sustainable, environmental, etc. all fail to capture the scope and urgency of us just using up and fouling our terrarium. Whatever you call it, it's worth the trouble.
Our generation will have to reverse the trend, we will be the ones that make the cultural shift and develop the technologies, laws and regulations to keep ourselves in check. We may even learn to work with other nations for a common good...which is bound to draw us closer.
Bottom Line #3 - "Green" is the catalyst for change. We have an opportunity to secure the future by caring about our own terrarium. By definition it's worth the trouble. The byproduct will be an increased consciousness of how we share this world and that our actions affect others, globally.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Great! Another green blog!
I sensed that some of you out there hadn't yet been overrun with "green, environmental, sustainable, global warming information."
All joking aside, that's why I started this blog. We want to go green -- and do the right thing environmentally - but , how are we supposed to sort out what works and what doesn't, and what's practical for our lives here in North Texas? What should I feel guilty about doing -- or not doing? What can I ignore? Answering those questions - the kinds that I had, that you hopefully have -- with research-based reality -- is my goal.
I won't just repeat the news, nor will I link you to lots of stuff to research yourself. I will always attempt to provide a clear direction on the topics covered. This will usually include opinions of mine developed from the research I have done. And, I have a long list of topics that I have already worked through to share with you the reader.
Please post at will and I will try to answer any questions or take suggestions for green topics that challenge you. Like, should I xeriscape? Why compost? Or, what is Anthropogenic Global Warming?
All joking aside, that's why I started this blog. We want to go green -- and do the right thing environmentally - but , how are we supposed to sort out what works and what doesn't, and what's practical for our lives here in North Texas? What should I feel guilty about doing -- or not doing? What can I ignore? Answering those questions - the kinds that I had, that you hopefully have -- with research-based reality -- is my goal.
I won't just repeat the news, nor will I link you to lots of stuff to research yourself. I will always attempt to provide a clear direction on the topics covered. This will usually include opinions of mine developed from the research I have done. And, I have a long list of topics that I have already worked through to share with you the reader.
Please post at will and I will try to answer any questions or take suggestions for green topics that challenge you. Like, should I xeriscape? Why compost? Or, what is Anthropogenic Global Warming?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)